ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Description
A redone version of my original Pikmin Attack. [link]
I did all the colouring digitally. (First time using the method.) I was quite pleased with the result.
Please let me know what you think of the shading and the background. Honesty and tips are appreciated.
I did all the colouring digitally. (First time using the method.) I was quite pleased with the result.
Please let me know what you think of the shading and the background. Honesty and tips are appreciated.
Image size
1260x1636px 169.7 KB
© 2011 - 2024 darkjon
Comments5
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
The poor guy 
They seem so sugar-sweet that even just their touch must burn like hell. 8D;
Either way: I know you only asked for critique on the shading and background, but I'm personally bugged by a bit more than just that.
As others have said; real grass structure and overall more detail would truly make a difference, as well as maybe a different setting - other than just the plain old grass-horizon-blue sky thing.
You might not want to hear any of this: but I can hardly believe what happened to the anatomy in here.
I assume that you prefer a simple cartoon-style, and are now silently cursing me in your head with thoughts like "Damn you, woman, I do cartoons hence I do not need realism!", but that's a mistake many people make. The best, most appealing cartoon-styles out there could only exist after the creators knew how things actually look like in the real world, and hence they could ridicule those looks in a way that doesn't seem amateuristic.
I believe that you wanted to make him look repressed, with limbs curling in all possible ways, yet as you probably haven't practised much with references it doesn't appear as well/funny as it could.
Just to put your situation up as an example: say, someone truly wants to make a joke about Bush. But all he's ever seen of Bush is the one image where Bush is holding corn whilst doing a speech. Hence all the jokes will concern Bush and corn, while there's actually so much more to ridicule about that man.
You've probably worked on reference once or twice - I can only assume - and pretty much stopped that entirely afterwards. Please note that by "reference", I mean REAL reference, not other drawings or such - but real photographs or real people.
If you'd work on everything there is to realism more, you'd have the skills to make the best cartoons/comics yet: including whatever other genre you'd be interested in, as there's nothing as enlighting as the real example in order to find what you like/dislike about it. And this image would automatically be of higher quality.
(I've seen a work of your art class where you drew a tiger lily: it's rather accurate, you know. ;D If you'd draw more people/human parts from real examples, there will be no limits to what you can do! )
I may sound like an old nag now. But, it's what we're confronted with in school every day. I study animation, hence you'd think: cartoon figures all the way! But in fact we work on realism and political issues a whole lot - in fact, people don't even get in if they're not strong enough with realism. There's so much more to a cartoon than anyone could imagine, and if you'd pump up the practise, you'd find all those qualities in your work.
They seem so sugar-sweet that even just their touch must burn like hell. 8D;Either way: I know you only asked for critique on the shading and background, but I'm personally bugged by a bit more than just that.
As others have said; real grass structure and overall more detail would truly make a difference, as well as maybe a different setting - other than just the plain old grass-horizon-blue sky thing.
You might not want to hear any of this: but I can hardly believe what happened to the anatomy in here.
I assume that you prefer a simple cartoon-style, and are now silently cursing me in your head with thoughts like "Damn you, woman, I do cartoons hence I do not need realism!", but that's a mistake many people make. The best, most appealing cartoon-styles out there could only exist after the creators knew how things actually look like in the real world, and hence they could ridicule those looks in a way that doesn't seem amateuristic.I believe that you wanted to make him look repressed, with limbs curling in all possible ways, yet as you probably haven't practised much with references it doesn't appear as well/funny as it could.
Just to put your situation up as an example: say, someone truly wants to make a joke about Bush. But all he's ever seen of Bush is the one image where Bush is holding corn whilst doing a speech. Hence all the jokes will concern Bush and corn, while there's actually so much more to ridicule about that man.
You've probably worked on reference once or twice - I can only assume - and pretty much stopped that entirely afterwards. Please note that by "reference", I mean REAL reference, not other drawings or such - but real photographs or real people.
If you'd work on everything there is to realism more, you'd have the skills to make the best cartoons/comics yet: including whatever other genre you'd be interested in, as there's nothing as enlighting as the real example in order to find what you like/dislike about it. And this image would automatically be of higher quality.
(I've seen a work of your art class where you drew a tiger lily: it's rather accurate, you know. ;D If you'd draw more people/human parts from real examples, there will be no limits to what you can do! )
I may sound like an old nag now. But, it's what we're confronted with in school every day. I study animation, hence you'd think: cartoon figures all the way! But in fact we work on realism and political issues a whole lot - in fact, people don't even get in if they're not strong enough with realism. There's so much more to a cartoon than anyone could imagine, and if you'd pump up the practise, you'd find all those qualities in your work.